Is it possible to parameterise a feature file in the same way it is a scenario? So each scenario in the feature could refer to some variables which are later defined by a single table for the entire feature file?
All of the answers I've found so far (Feature and scenario outline name in cucumber before hook for example) use Ruby meta-programming, which doesn't inspire much hope for the jvm setup I'm using.
No its not, and for good reason. Feature files are meant to be simple and readable, they are not for programming. Even using scenario outlines and tables is generally not a good thing, so taking this further and having a feature that cannot be understood without reading some other thing that defines variables is counter productive.
You can however put all your variables and stuff in step definitions and write your feature at a higher level of abstraction. You'll find implementing this much easier, as you can use a programming language (which is good at this stuff).
One way of parameterising a feature file is to generate it from a template at compile-time. Then at runtime your cucumber runner executes the generated feature file.
This is fairly easy to do if you are using gradle. Here is an example:
In build.gradle, add groovy code like this:
import groovy.text.GStringTemplateEngine
task generateFeatureFiles {
doFirst {
File featuresDir = new File(sourceSets.main.output.resourcesDir, "features")
File templateFile = new File(featuresDir, "myFeature.template")
def(String bestDay, String currentDay) = ["Friday", "Sunday"]
File featureFile = new File(featuresDir, "${bestDay}-${currentDay}.feature")
Map bindings = [bestDay: bestDay, currentDay: currentDay]
String featureText = new GStringTemplateEngine().createTemplate(templateFile).make(bindings)
featureFile.text = featureText
}
}
processResources.finalizedBy(generateFeatureFiles)
myFeature.template is in the src/main/resources/features directory and might look like this:
Feature: Is it $bestDay yet?
Everybody wants to know when it's $bestDay
Scenario: $currentDay isn't $bestDay
Given today is $currentDay
When I ask whether it's $bestDay yet
Then I should be told "Nope"
Running the build task will create a Friday-Sunday.feature file in build/src/main/resources with the bestDay and currentDay parameters filled in.
The generateFeatureFiles custom task runs immediately after the processResources task. The generated feature file can then be executed by the cucumber runner.
You could generate any number of feature files from the feature template file. The code could read in parameters from a config file in your resources directory for example.
Related
I'm working on a Kotlin multi-platform project, and I need my JS tests to run on Node.js but with custom command line arguments (specifically I need node to run with the --expose-gc flag, because some tests need to trigger garbage collection).
Looking at the documentation for the Gradle Kotlin JS DSL I didn't find any mention of how to do that; does anyone know whether it's at all possible and how?
Unfortunately can not answer your question directly, but there is some suggestion to help you with reverse engineering.
Let's start from some example. We have Gradle tasks to run our project using webpack's dev server such as browserDevelopmentRun, browserProductionRun (not sure if multi-platform projects have it, but JS projects do). We can add:
println(tasks.named("browserProductionRun").get().javaClass)
to build.gradle.kts to find out the exact class used for this task. When we sync Gradle, it outputs:
org.jetbrains.kotlin.gradle.targets.js.webpack.KotlinWebpack_Decorated
Now we know the exact class of this task so we can investigate its API. The auto completion or navigating inside of the KotlinWebpack class helps us to find out that it has a helpful nodeArgs property to configure NodeJS arguments for it, so we can set them, for example:
tasks.named("browserProductionRun", org.jetbrains.kotlin.gradle.targets.js.webpack.KotlinWebpack::class).get().nodeArgs.add("--trace-deprecation")
Getting back to your question.
In your case I guess you need to investigate the browserTest task. Let's get some info about it by adding:
println(tasks.named("browserTest").get().javaClass)
to build.gradle.kts - a-ha - it seems to be of the org.jetbrains.kotlin.gradle.targets.js.testing.KotlinJsTest_Decorated type. Let's check what's inside. Open KotlinJsTest.kt somehow - for example by typing its name into the window being opened by CMD + Shift + O (make sure to select "All Places" here) or just by typing its name somewhere in build.gradle.kts and navigating inside it.
The only interesting thing I see inside this open class is the following block:
override fun createTestExecutionSpec(): TCServiceMessagesTestExecutionSpec {
val forkOptions = DefaultProcessForkOptions(fileResolver)
forkOptions.workingDir = npmProject.dir
forkOptions.executable = nodeJs.requireConfigured().nodeExecutable
val nodeJsArgs = mutableListOf<String>()
return testFramework!!.createTestExecutionSpec(
task = this,
forkOptions = forkOptions,
nodeJsArgs = nodeJsArgs,
debug = debug
)
}
So maybe it can work out to create your own extension of this class, override its createTestExecutionSpec method and provide nodeJsArgs as you need inside it. After that you'll be needing to declare another Gradle task to launch tests inside build.gradle.kts which will use this new extended class.
I use sub-flows extensively and would like to have an option to generate a separate ATE flow file per sub-flow (e.g. on V93K a separate .tf file). Is this possible? Perhaps something like this, wih the default being the current behavior:
import :my_subflow, generate_standalone: true
The reason this is valuable is that we use a test program assembler that can merge multiple flow files together given a sequence of flow files. This saves on test program load time for debug sessions.
thx
There is no switch like that currently, but note that you can generate sub-flows directly:
origen p program/_my_subflow.rb
The leading "_" in the name means that they will be not be generated as standalone flows if you point the program generator to the directory (origen p program/), but if you explicitly ask it to generate that file then it will.
I have a large suite of feature files, and every single scenario is tagged #regression.
After running full regression I realized that some features do not need to be run for the current environment.
What is the best approach to ignore specific scenarios keeping in mind that each scenario is tagged with #regression?
You can use Tags to run certain features/scenarios, or not run them.
To specifically ignore them, see Ignoring a subset of scenarios:
"You can tell Cucumber to ignore scenarios with a particular tag:
Using JUnit runner class:
#CucumberOptions(tags = "not #smoke")
public class RunCucumberTest {}
"
I am trying to set a module's source (this IS NOT a resource) based on a conditional trigger but it looks like the module is getting fired before the logic is applied:
module "my_module" {
source = "${var.my_field == "" ? var.standard_repo : var.custom_repo}"
stuff...
more stuff...
}
I have created the standard_repo and custom_repo vars as well and defined with URLs for respective repos (using git:: -- this all works w/o conditional)
All this being said, anyone know of a way to implement this conditional aspect? (again, this is a module and not a resource)
I tried using duplicate modules and calling based off the var value but this, too, does not work (condition is never met, even when it is):
repo = ["${var.my_field == "na" ? module.my_module_old : module.my_module_new}"]
One way to achieve this is described in this post
Basically, a common pattern is to have several folders for different environments such as dev/tst/prd. These environments often reuse large parts of the codebase. Some may be abstracted as modules, but there is still often a large common file which is either copy-pasted or symlinked.
The post offers a way that doesn't conditionally disable based on variables but it probably solves your issue of enabling a module based on different enviornments. It makes use of the override feature of terraform and adds a infra_override.tf file. Here, it defines a different source for the module which points to an empty directory. Voila, a disabled module.
Variables are not allowed to be used in the module source parameter. There also does not seem to be a plan for this to change. https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/issues/1439 . Creating a wrapper script , or using something like mustache http://mustache.github.io/ seems to be the best way to solve the problem.
I have a cucumber feature file 'A' that serves as setting up environment (data clean up and initialization). I want to have it executed before all other feature files can run.
It's it kind of like #before hook as in http://zsoltfabok.com/blog/2012/09/cucumber-jvm-hooks/. However, that does not work because my feature files 'A' contains hundreds of cucumber steps and it is not as simple as:
#Before
public void beforeScenario() {
tomcat.start();
tomcat.deploy("munger");
browser = new FirefoxDriver();
}
instead it's better to be able to run 'A' as a feature file as a whole.
I've searched around but did not find a answer. I am so surprised that no one has this type of requirement before.
The closest i found is 'background'. But that means i can have only one huge feature file with the content of 'A' as 'background' at the top, and rest of my test in the same file. I really do not want to do that.
Any suggestions?
By default, Cucumber features are run single thread in order by:
Alphabetically by feature file directory
Alphabetically by feature file name within directory
Scenario execution is then by order within the feature file.
So have your initialization feature in the first directory (alhpabetically) with a file name that sorts first (alphabetically) in that directory.
That being said it is generally a bad practice to require an execution order in your feature files. We run our feature files in parallel so order is meaningless. For Jenkins or TeamCity you could add a build step that executes the one feature file followed by a second build step that executes the rest of your feature files.
I have also a project, where we have a single feature file, that contains a very long scenario called Scenario: Test data with a lot of very long scenarios, like this:
Given the system knows about the following employees
|uuid|user-key|name|nickname|
|1|0101140000|Anna|annie|
... hundreds of lines like this follow ...
We see this long SystemKnows scenarios as quite valuable, so that our testers, Product Owner and developers have a baseline of what data are in the system. Our domain is quite complex, and we need this baseline of reference data for everyone to be able to understand the tests.
(These reference data become almost like well known personas, and are a shared team metaphore)
In the beginning, we were relying on the alphabetic naming convention, to have the AAA.feature to be run first.
Later, we discovered that this setup was brittle, and decided to use the following trick, inspired by the PageObject pattern:
Add a background with the single line Given(~'^I set test data for all feature files$')
In the step definition, have a factory to create the test data, and make sure inside the factore method, that it is only created once, like testFactory.createTestData()
In this way, you have both the convenience of expressing reference setup as a scenario, that enhances team communication, but you also have a stable test setup.
Hope this is helpful!
Agata